Las grandes empresas tecnológicas como Google, Facebook y Amazon actúan prácticamente como monopolios. Así lo considera el académico Jonathan Taplin, quien advierte de los riesgos de prolongar esta situación, también para la democracia. BBC Mundo habló con él.
YouTube offers a helping hand with helpful tips for nation states planning on boosting their profile on the video sharing site
The stereotypical YouTuber is in their teens or younger, and uses the site as a one-stop-shop for media, spending little time using traditional broadcast media such as TV or radio. In other words, about as far from the typical politician as you can imagine.
Perhaps that’s why YouTube has decided to give governments a helping hand on the service, launching the YouTube for Government page. It offers helpful tips for nation states planning on boosting their profile on the video sharing site, encouraging them to “curate content” and “engage your community”.
The US government is highlighted for praise, with Barack Obama’s web chat with citizens singled out as an example of engagement and the livestreaming of the state of the union address held up as the best way to get a message out, live, to constituents.
It’s not all American: Britain’s House of Lords does get a hat-tip for “organising their videos into easily understandable sections”, while the Greek, Chilean and South Korean governments all get a slap on the back for their “well-organised government channels”.
But while YouTube’s owner, Google, is obviously keen to see governments using the site’s features to their fullest extent – and hopefully moving sideways on to the company’s Google+ social network, which is required to make a YouTube account these days – it hasn’t addressed the most glaring area where governments need help: their content.
Livestreaming speeches and uploading TV appearances is all well and good, but there comes a time in every political YouTube channel when it starts trying to do something different, and someone says the dreaded words “original content”.
Because politicians are many things, but talented media maestros they are not. So, picking up from where Google left off, here are our best tips for politics on YouTube.
WikiLeaks man talks with Ars—new book may reveal more about him than its subject.
It would be too much to say that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange feels optimistic. He’s been holed up in the Ecuadorean embassy in London for more than two years now, with cameras and police—”a £3 million surveillance operation,” he calls it—just meters away.
“There’s a sense of inevitability now,” Assange said when we asked if his situation might change.
Assange: “The situation is clarifying politically and legally.”
Ars: “I just want to be clear on this point—are you saying you’re hopeful you’ll be free soon?”
Assange: “I wouldn’t say hopeful. I would say it’s inevitable. It’s inevitable that we will win the diplomatic standoff we’re in now.”
It’s getting late in London, where Assange is doing a barrage of press interviews on the eve of his new book, When Google Met Wikileaks (it goes on sale in the US later this week). We called at the agreed upon time, and a man who didn’t identify himself answered the number, which was for a London cell phone. He said call back in five minutes, and only then was the phone finally handed to Assange.
We’re supposed to focus on the book. But first, we want to know what life trapped in the embassy involves—where does he eat, sleep, do laundry? What is the room he’s in now like?
“For security reasons, I can’t tell you which sections of the embassy I utilize,” he said. “As to the rest, in a way, it’s a perfectly normal situation. In another way, it’s one of the most abnormal, unusual situations that someone can find themselves in.”
Assange ushered WikiLeaks through several massive leaks of secret US government reports and a tumultuous relationship with some prominent newspapers. first came the disclosure of hundreds of thousands of military reports on the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts, then a leak of more than 250,000 diplomatic cables from the State Department.
He sought asylum from Ecuador when he was on the verge of being extradited to Sweden to face sexual-assault charges in that nation. If he leaves the embassy, he’ll be arrested, although it isn’t clear where he’ll be sent first. It’s widely assumed the US has an ongoing investigation into Assange over the leaks.
Asked about what his future outside the embassy walls might look like, he stays focused on the legal battles ahead. “We have a lot of dominos to knock over,” he said. “There are three or four different legal cases going on, and technical means to obstruct the asylum.”
He knows his travel will always be circumscribed to a degree, but Assange seems comfortable with that. He’s cognizant of the parallels between his situation and that of Edward Snowden.
“He has freedom of movement,” Assange acknowledged. “But his freedom of movement excludes a number of countries which can be pressured by the US, and that’s also true for me.”
His voice sounded scratchy as he spoke to Ars about how Google and its chairman Eric Schmidt were at the “center of American power,” pushing an “aggressive new ideology.” In the background, another phone started ringing. Assange wasn’t distracted. Half prisoner, half professor, he kept talking in the same slow cadence, with an insistent and didactic focus on making his point.
Reports based on press release from unpublished study suggesting search results could be used to ‘fix’ election untrue
“Did Google fix Lok Sabha elections?” asks the India Times. Computer Business Review appeared more certain with the “How Google search results are influencing elections” headline for its version of the story.
Even the Daily Mail joined in, asking “Could Google fix an election?”
Only one thing: Google is not “fixing” the Lok Sabha elections. The company is absolute in its denial. “Providing relevant answers has been the cornerstone of Google’s approach to search from the very beginning,” a spokesman told the Guardian. “Our results reflect what’s on the web, and we rigorously protect the integrity of our algorithms. It would undermine people’s trust in our results and company if we were to change course.”
Indeed, Google has no intention of doing so; and its search results have not influenced the Indian elections beyond providing links to information that is on the web.
So why the furore? The stories all lead back to a press release put out on 13 May by the “American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology“, an independent – that is, unaffiliated with any major university – research organisation based in California. That release was headlined “Could Google have fixed the Lok Sabha elections? A landmark new study in India shows it’s possible”.
De acuerdo al sitio web, esta práctica “está a lo menos reñida con la ética, además de infringir algunas de normativas que tiene la plataforma de anuncios de Google, que basa el despliegue de anuncios en la relevancia que tiene el anuncio para el usuario, la página de destino y la calidad del anuncio”.
Una denuncia contra el comando de la abanderada de la Alianza, Evelyn Matthei, realizó el sitio web El Magallanews en el sentido que al hacer la búsqueda en Google de Michelle Bachelet, Marco Enríquez Ominami y Marcel Claude, muchas veces aparece en primer lugar un aviso de la candidata oficialista.
El presidente de Google Brasil, Fabio José Silva Coelho, fue arrestado brevemente este miércoles por no retirar de YouTube videos que atacan a un candidato a alcalde, en un nuevo capítulo de los problemas judiciales que enfrentan Google y Facebook en Brasil.
El primer martes de noviembre se votó en los Estados Unidos. Así lo establece su calendario electoral y se cumple rigurosamente cada cuatro años, desde hace décadas. No es una elección cualquiera. Se elige al Presidente que estará al timón de la potencia más importante del planeta. Su poder no es poca cosa. De todas maneras, es conocida la influencia que tienen otros factores de poder que no aparecen entre los candidatos que figuran en las boletas electorales.
Wall Street es una calle de Nueva York. Ella le dio el nombre al mayor mercado de valores del mundo. Allí operan, con sus acciones, las principales empresas del planeta y es el centro del capitalismo mundial. Al día de hoy las principales acciones de Wall Street están concentradas en dos sectores: Bancario e informático. Allí está la “cocina” del poder mundial. En esta oportunidad las empresas del sector bancario volcaron su apoyo (en dólares y otras yerbas) al candidato republicano, Mitt Rommey. Los 8 principales aportantes a su campaña provienen de ese rubro. Los sectores informáticos (Google, Microsoft) dieron su aval y fueron los mayores sostenedores de la campaña de Barack Obama.